Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22
of compromise, if the so-called fiscal cliff talks do not come to a conclusion, it's implemented, have you looked at how you have to compromise the university of pennsylvania? how it would affect the university of pennsylvania? >> yeah. if we were to go over the miscall cliff, and more so if there isn't compromise that really establishes the american financial system on solid grounding, then there will be many ways in which we, as a university, and every university in the country will be compromised in the sense of compromising our quality. we will be -- we depend upon the funding of biomedical research to spur innovation in the country. that will dry up. we are committed to making penn affordable for the undergraduates which costs $181 million a year. that's twice the amount it costs us eight years august because we ramped up financial aid, and the more unemployment terrorist in the country, the more we spend on financial aid, and it would be a tragedy if the country moved in a direction to make education less affordable so, we, as a university, are very dependent and very concerned about
have been a policy areas of the fiscal cliff talks. today the alternative minimum tax. hope i said that a. >> guest: something that was passed in the 1960s to animate a small group of high income individuals that were not paying any taxes. it did not have an inflation adjustment, so now the group has grown enormously and we assume in a budgeting sense the way we budget that this revenue will come in. it's not going to comment because if we allow the text if you can look at tens of millions of america. so we fixed it. i would hope in the next year we could have a permanent fix to get it out of the budgetary budget. same thing with what is called sgr, sustainable growth with medicare and medicaid. we patched these things over. let's figure out a way to get it out of the budgeting process so numbers can be something they can project forward realistically. >> host: is this a big deal? >> guest: it is. if we were to not get it then it would be a big deal. we raise taxes on millions of americans overnight. this is one of those things they don't take about because we never let it happen.
: domestic spending cuts is on the table for the fiscal cliff talks. two different perspectives for you here. isabel sawhill, brookings institution. brookings center on children and families. james capretta ethics and public policy center and visiting scholar at aei. let me begin with you. are these potential domestic cuts under sequestration devastating or manageable? >> guest: somewhere in between. not a good idea. they would be very deep cuts, you know, an 8% cut across the board is a very significant one-time cut for any program to sustain in immediate year period. so they're not a good idea. would it be the end of the world, no? >> host: what do you mean by that? >> guest: well, i mean there would be downsizing of a lot of services across the government in terms of the domestic accounts. so it would be fewer services being provided. there would be reduced federal employees. some grant programs would take a haircut of five, 10%. so there would be downsizing of the services provided by the federal government. but the economy would go on and the government would go on and the public would
to correct the record. but first during this talk about the fiscal cliff and about the tax cuts that sunset at the end of the year, all we've been hearing since the election is about what are we going to do about taxes? that's a very significant thing as a result of the last election because i think it's a foregone conclusion there's going to be more revenue raised. but if we raise the amount of revenue that the president wants raised and raise it from the 2% that he wants to raise it from -- the wealthy -- that's only going to run the government for eight days. so what do you do the other 357 days? or if you look at the deficit, it will only take care of 7% of the $1 trillion-plus deficit that we have every year. what about the other 93%? so the point being that we can talk about taxes and taxes and taxes, but it's not going to solve the fiscal problems facing our nation. we don't have a taxing problem. we have a spending problem. and so we should have been spending the last three weeks talking about how we're going to take care of the other 93% of the problem. the president should have de
leaders plan to handle social security as part of the fiscal cliff talks. later, more on the role of social security would the aarp and david john of the heritage foundation. "washington journal" is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. an official with the department of housing and urban development brief the banking committee of the senate on housing programs that provide rental housing for over 3 million low-income families. she talks about proposals and simplifying operations and reducing cost and hud section eight programs. this is 40 minutes. >> i call this hearing to order. i would like to welcome the honorable senator sandra henriquez about the hud section eight program. millions try to afford everyday a roof over their head. currently, persons with a full-time job and earned about $18.50 per hour in order to afford a modest two-bedroom rental, is the national average. this is an amount far from minimum wage for the income provided by social security income. a further penalty is not just the problem of the largest cities in the country. the hud committee developme
a successful outcome not just to these fiscal cliff talks, but also to this longer-term issue of debt and deficit and economic growth. i was asked today to focus a little bit on what might be possible in terms of tax reform. i know tax reform and health care reform are the two topics we're discussing this morning and, again, i look forward to hearing from gene and also this distinguished panel behind us. with regard to the tax and health care reform issues, i'll make a simple point which is that if we go through this fiscal cliff discussion and do not take advantage of that opportunity to put in place reforms to the entitlement programs which are incredibly important but also up sustainable, and if we do not take advantage of it to look at our tax system which is antiquated, outdated, inefficient, we will have swappedderred the opportunity to really -- squanders the opportunity to address the long-term problem. we'll be right back on the cliff again. so the first fiscal cliff is approaching, we have to address it. if we do not, we'll see about $500 billion in tax increases, we'll see
and social security should be part of negotiations on fiscal cliff. we will talk with john larson on how house democrats take on the issue and stephen ola and christina martin and david john of the heritage foundation, on the long-term solvency of social security. "washington journal" is live every morning on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> the white house was very controversial as most americans were. >> it was designed for appellate, but americans were having a pellets. it was not particularly awe-inspiring. a european diplomat told the congress that it was neither large or are of the awe-inspiring nature. to . >> "new york times" critic kitty goldberg gathered photographs in history on sunday evening at 730 eastern and pacific on c-span3 american history tv. >> president obama this evening said the u.s. now recognizes the main syrian opposition group as the legitimate representative of its country's people. turkish journalism has reported that the new america foundation. two men have returned from the country into the to the west can do more to help the syrian people. [inaudible conve
secretary geithner toward fixing the fiscal cliff that's been so much talked about. and i just want to say, sadly, that the facts are that real numbers disprove what they have alleged the plan would do. and we've look the at the numbers. there's no real mystery about this. and there are gimmicks and manipulations in the way they've expressed what they intend to accomplish that i think are beyond the pale and the american people need to know that it's not accurate. this would not be possible if we had the plan on the floor so it could be voted on in the light of day. but we all know what the plan is, the scheme is, the strategy is. it is to be meeting in secret, and then plop down on the floor of the senate at the last hour some sort of coerced agreement that all the senators, like lemmings, are supposed to vote for. and we're supposed to expect that the american people will believe the agreement is what the president says it is, but that is not in reality what's occurring. he's been -- secretary geithner -- meeting with senate -- house members, particularly last week. he presented a propos
they know is wrong. as you know, they talk about the fiscal cliff. some people say it's a slope. somebody said it was a bungi jump. somebody said it was a skate board trip, down and then up and so forth. bottom line, i think, it's no way to govern. it is a giant mistake to have all of this in a pool of ambiguity, and as i understand it now, you would know more. i mean, it truly is a stalemate. they are not talking. >> now, you point out that it's the same player, and, i think, you'll agree player that is matter most are the president, speaker boehner. what do we know about the personal relationship that might illuminate what's going on right now? >> well, they started out last year when they were working on the debt ceiling, and they had what are calledded the merlot and nicorette's meetings. in other words, boehner would have a merlot, and obama would chew nicorette. >> you point outside in the book somehow when they took the official photo, both of those vanished. >> yes. they had iced tea there for obama. of course, boehner had his seg represent, and they put the cigarette in the ashtr
, before we talk about fiscal cliff, we'll get because the last fiscal cliff. we had another fiscal cliff types of new with the debt limit to create a center that led to this ridiculous idea that i voted against that let's put a bunch of bad things to happen at one time because that will force washington to do something. surprise, it didn't work. here we are again. so we have to issues. number one is an immediate term to avoid doing damage. that's to avoid doing harm. so we need to look for a way to accomplish that in the short term. then we have had a conversation about getting the fiscal house in order it's just fundamentally true. we spend a trillion dollars a year more than we take in to assist attack. i approached this issue that the only way we can get that in order is to rapid economic growth. there's no taxes to raise. what the presidential post does not raise enough revenue, but it will make a dent on job creation, particularly middle-class job creation. so that's why i oppose this blanket instead i think we should do real tax reform. if there are loopholes, there's a loophole fo
to discuss legislation we could actually pass. i'm not talking about the fiscal cliff or sequester, anything quite so heavy. but, nevertheless, quite important. it's got bipartisan support, already been passed out of the agriculture committee, passed out of the house of representatives by 300 votes, but it has yet to be brought to the senate floor for debate. that debate could being over with in half an hour the majority leader talks about bipartisan support for legislation and hurdles to bringing bipartisan legislation to the floor. obviously we have them. but i want to remind the senate that this bill has already passed the house, as i have said, with broad, bipartisan support, and again with over 300 votes. that doesn't happen often in the house of representatives these days. and it passed out of the senate ag committee with bipartisan support, didn't even need to have a hearing. but yet the majority leader has not allowed this come to to the floor without a vote. i would urge him to do that. i am talk about h.r. about the g regulatory burdens act of 2011. how could anybody be opposed to
enmeshed in debates on the fiscal cliff but we brought him here today to talk about long-term challenges and how we connect the dots. with that, gene sperling. [applause] >> thank you very much. it is intimidating to have already followed your panel. i like much more when you get to be the first person to mention every idea and the panel's save as gene sperling said, now you go after the president's of harvard, glenn hutchins, susan mollen ari, and parter with my wife on issues of child trafficking, a special place in our home. a lot has already been said and since i didn't get to hear all i don't know whether i will be repeating again. let me start by doing economic policy, particularly in this area reminding ourselves what is the end goal of economic policy? you hear a lot of metrics on gdp, growth, productivity as if those were the ends in themselves. they are all means to an end, ultimate goals of economic policy which to me, are we a nation in which the accident of your birth is not determined by the outcome of your life, there's a real chance for everyone to rise? are we an economy
thinks they know is wrong. as you know they talk about the fiscal cliff. some people say if the slope. some say it's a bungee jump. somebody says it is seascape word trip that's going to go down and up and so forth. bottom line i think it's no way to cover. it is a giant mistake to have all of this innate pool of ambiguity. as i understand it now coming due at no more. it truly is a stalemate. they're not talking. >> you point out the same players and the players who matter most are the president, speaker boehner. what do we know about the personal relationship that might eliminate what's going on right now? >> they've started out last year when they were working on the debt ceiling and they had buber called the merlot and nicorette meeting come in other words, boehner would have a merlot and obama which you nicorette. >> you point out in the boat somehow when they took the official photo, both of the spanish. >> yes, they had iced tea for obama. of course boehner had a cigarette and they put the cigarette in the ashtray away from the picture. but they haven't closed the deal on the p
an avalanche of e-mails. you were talking to your group, and you said you wanted to use the phrase "fiscal cliff." and you, and you slipped and said something else that you won't say, but i just wandered if anybody -- wondered if anybody caught it besides me. >> a lot of people did. [laughter] okay, if you do two shows a day, that's going to happen. and, by the way, i'm not even sure what i said. [laughter] but there are, there is two versions of it. [laughter] there's one that's profane, and then there's one that's really biological. [laughter] so we will just -- you know what? it was such an obvious slip of the tongue -- [laughter] this is the reagan library, people. [laughter] make me sick. [laughter] your minds. >> real quick, we'll go up here on the balcony. >> hi. i and my young boys are a big fan of yours. i have my 13 and 10-year-old watching you every day. >> oh, thanks. where are you? >> i'm up here. >> way -- [laughter] >> oh. great, where? oh. [laughter] >> actually, when i told them i was coming to see you, they wanted to come too. they're big fans. >> oh. so you put them in t
of negotiations over what is called the fiscal cliff. also, don't forget to explore the history and literary culture of new york capital city of albany this weekend. book tv is on c-span2 and american history to be on c-span three. >> coming up at 7:00 c-span will be lot of discussion unskilled immigrants. virginia senator mark warner is sponsoring a bill to allow more highly skilled veterans and to the u.s. >> we have had these this the five explosions of knowledge in madison, but we have not coordinated care. all the services that we have end up having some any cracks that the cracks are as harmful as the diseases that we are treating. we have to step back and ask, you know, are we hurting people overall? and income on a global level where we doing some times? and, of course, now we have to these reports saying 30 percent of everything we do may not be necessary in after. we will be step back, 30 percent of all the medications we prescribe, the tests we order, the procedures. this is something, i think, which is for the first time really being called out as a problem. >> dysfunction in the
. >> on tomorrow morning's washington gorgeous -- washington journal, we continue a look at the fiscal cliff and what happens if those cuts take place in january. after that, charles clark of the government executive media group, looks at the domestic program cuts. and then more about the issue with is bell sawhill
of solving the immediate fiscal cliff decision. how would you describe your feeling that there will be some kind of accommodation deals these on the tax or the spending side, or both? >> first of all, good morning. and just, i'm not gene sperling. but i'm very pleased to give you my perspective on where we are. and let me just say, hearing some of the poll video here, the beginning of the question, i will start by something that i often say when i'm giving remarks, that i'm struck with in my district, i hope many of us are, having a swing district in the suburbs of philadelphia, people in the same group, no matter how partisan they are more have nonpartisan the group is, they will say to differ quite a stupid pills and i want you to go to washington and i want you to stand on defenseless but i don't want you to give an inch. values matter, our priorities matter. i want you to go and fight for us. i will. then someone else will get up and say, i want you to compromise, i want you to find a middle ground, i want you to get these done. that's the 10th time this happened to me. i thought that's
for 2012 i'd like the rest of the fiscal cliff the effects next year the patch applies to the return we will have to file for next year. if there is not congressional action this is the abrupt increase of taxes of the 2012 taxes in 2011 approximately 4 million people if there is not a patch 30 million people will be required to pay in 2012 for the current taxable year very few have any idea this is on the table. >>host: is the ira's prepared? >>guest: datuk a fairly prepared unusual but correct position that congress do the responsible thing. they did their tax programming for the 2012 return assuming congress would enact a patch. i think that was reasonable because i believe they will but it does mean if there is not a patch the tax return filing season will be the opposite. >>host: we are welcoming representative cole house speaker john boehner sens the proposal what do you think? >> it is a great opening start makes sarid tangible what the speaker committed to it after the election to the revenue on the table not how much or what way with that is inner misstep by the republicans not
things done. not limited to just worry about the debt and fiscal cliff and such. our program today just loosely, i'm welcoming you, obviously, joan walker's going the talk, ed reilly of sgi is going the give the polling results, and then ron brownstein of national journal is going to do our interview, and then we're going to have a panel discussion. so it's going to be a full and absolutely terrific day, i think. please, turn these babies off. and, again, welcome you. let me introduce joan walker. joan is executive vice president of allstate which is one of the country's largest insurance, we're in good hands with allstate, we all grew up with that. joan has been a terrific partner, in the last four years she's responsible for all corporate relations with allstate. prior to joining that company in 2005, she did similar work with monsanto and qwest. she is a consummate marketing and communications strategist which, of course, in this town of washington is really all about. so, joan, thank you very much, and we want to welcome our friends here. [applause] >> good morning, and thank you so
and toward this so-called cliff. i've been talking to a number of my colleagues, republicans and democrats and others, there is a majority consensus here for putting together a credible long-term package to deal with our fiscal situation which would send a message to the world and send a message to our citizens that the congress and the government are serious about addressing our fiscal situation and putting us on a path to fiscal health. and in doing so it would restore the confidence of the american people, it would restore the confidence of investors around the world that america is getting its act together at a time when europe is struggling, at the time when japan is struggling and slowing down, when china growth is slowing, the world is looking to the united states to take the lead. as it has so many times in so many crises before. yet all they see is the stand-off and the inability to do what i think we all need to do. now, the choice is very clear. we have come to the point where i think most people looking at this understand that if we don't act now, the so-called kicking the can
and congress as we face the fiscal cliff. he said at one point that the president is calling for raising taxes $1.6 billion. that's true. but i would call to his attention the fact that the simpson-bowles commission suggested that 40% of the $4 trillion in deficit reduction come from revenue in taxes. what the president is suggesting is entirely consistent with that bipartisan group's call for more revenue in taxes as part of our deficit reduction. the president's made it clear, though, he wants to protect and insulate middle-income families from any income tax increases, and i agree with him. we should not raise the income taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year. i voted that way in july. we sent the bill to the house. it sits there. it languishes in the house because the speaker won't call it. he has his chance this week or the next to call that bill on the floor of the house of representatives to avoid any tax increase on middle-income families. that's an important thing for us to get done before we leave at the end of this particular session of congress. let me say that $1.6 trilli
the consequences of going over the fiscal cliff. and, madam president, i've only been here 36 years, but i've seen every president willing to meet on a regular basis at budget-crunch time with people on both sides of the table over and over and over again until they gradually whittle it down to where they agree. i haven't seen that with president obama. i've seen heard democrats complain that he never talks to them. we cannot do this kind of work without very, very strong presidential effort. that's what presidents are for. and it can't just be laying down a gauntlet sand say, you can't -- and say, you can't cross over that, or drawing a line in the sand. we need -- you got two programs now. and those two sides need to get together. and that includes the president and whatever democrats he cares to put in the equation and also speaker boehner, leader mcconnell, and others. as we attempt to reach a meaningful resolution of this debate in the coming weeks, there are three guideposts that i will keep in sight. first is the cliff itself. going over it would be the height of irresponsibility. and accor
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22